Human Condition
Tom Stoppard's play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead weaves together two narratives: Shakespeare's classic Hamlet and Stoppard's inventive exploration of how the two courtiers might have felt and acted after being called by King Claudius to spy on their friend, Hamlet.
When Stoppard opted to focus on Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, he had the creative freedom to develop their characters because Shakespeare provided them with minimal depth. This allowed him to have them speak in a more relaxed manner and to delve into aspects of their lives that Shakespeare left unexplored, such as their interactions with Hamlet during their journey to England. However, once Stoppard chose to blend his story with Shakespeare's, the destiny of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern was predetermined—they had to meet their end in Stoppard's narrative, just as they do in Shakespeare’s. Stoppard uses this unavoidable literary conclusion as a metaphor for the inevitable fate that awaits all humans: death.
The play begins with Stoppard's storyline, featuring two distinctly un-Shakespearean courtiers flipping coins while pausing on their way to Elsinore. The improbable streak of over 100 coins landing "heads" before one finally lands "tails" suggests that this day is extraordinary. When a coin eventually lands "tails," Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are quickly pulled back into the world of Shakespeare's narrative, from which they originated. Once they re-enter Shakespeare's tale, their fate is set. They will perish at the conclusion, even as they shift between Shakespeare's and Stoppard's narratives. This day's uniqueness triggers the sequence of events leading to their demise.
Fate is predetermined, beyond human influence, and unavoidable regardless of human actions. This literary fatalism, born from entering a preordained world, serves as a metaphor for human destiny in Stoppard's work. Despite attempts at defiance, humans are destined to die from the moment they enter the world.
When the tragedians first appear in Stoppard's narrative, Guildenstern comments, "it was chance, then ... [that] you found us," to which the Player responds, "or fate." Numerous references follow about "getting caught up in the action" of the Shakespearean play, along with mentions of lacking "control." During their rehearsal for The Murder of Gonzago, when the Player states, "everyone who is marked for death dies," Guildenstern asks, "Who decides?" The Player answers, "Decides? It is written."
Art and Experience
Stoppard explores the theme of fate by delving into the relationship between art and human experience. Throughout the play, he uses the tragedians and their leader, the Player, to demonstrate how art can create an illusion that feels more genuine and convincing than the experiences of everyday life.
The tragedians are skilled at depicting death on stage, yet Guildenstern argues that their portrayal of death lacks authenticity. In response, the Player claims that the only type of death people are willing to accept is the fictional kind. He shares a story about arranging for an actor, condemned to be hanged, to face his execution on stage. Surprisingly, the audience ridiculed this "real death," throwing peanuts at the actor, who, unable to face his fate calmly, wept throughout the performance, "right out of character."
According to Sigmund Freud, humans are psychologically incapable of imagining themselves as deceased. When confronted with death in dreams, we either wake up or change the dream, becoming mere observers. As observers, we haven't truly experienced death. However, through art, we can safely encounter death vicariously, allowing us to test our reactions. This paradoxically prepares us for our own death while simultaneously distancing us from its reality. Acting as spectators might be the closest humans can come to accepting the truth of their mortality.
This concept is most vividly illustrated in Act III, when...
(This entire section contains 317 words.)
Unlock this Study Guide Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
a frustrated Guildenstern attacks the Player, seemingly stabbing him fatally in the neck with a dagger. Audience members, like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who initially do not realize the stage dagger has a retractable blade, may experience a moment of shock, believing a real death has occurred on stage. However, they quickly recall they are watching a play and that this death is not genuine. When the Player stands up to applause from his fellow tragedians, the audience laughs in relief, as does Rosencrantz, who claps and calls for an encore.
Death
The theme of humans denying their mortality sheds light on several challenging aspects of the play. For example, when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern discover that Claudius's letter demands Hamlet's execution, they, usually empathetic and friendly, distance themselves from the issue and rationalize their inaction. Although their behavior appears disagreeable and lacking in heroism, it aligns with Stoppard's theme. Guildenstern rationalizes his inaction by feigning acceptance of "the designs of fate," while Rosencrantz shirks responsibility, underscored by his statement that foreshadows the play's ending—"If we stopped breathing we'd vanish." Their behavior becomes even more troubling when they realize the amended letter orders their own deaths. In Shakespeare's version, the characters were likely unaware of the letter's contents and caught off guard by their executions. In contrast, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern know they are delivering their own death sentences yet take no steps to prevent it. Staying true to form, Rosencrantz chooses not to dwell on it—"All right, then. I don't care. I've had enough. To tell you the truth, I'm relieved," while Guildenstern continues to search for explanations and escape—"there must have been a moment ... where we could have said— no." His final words either signify continued denial of his demise or acceptance of his role as a fictional character—"well, we'll know better next time."
Stoppard's theme is perhaps most clearly expressed in Rosencrantz's speech in Act II about being in a coffin. Abruptly, he asks Guildenstern, "do you ever think of yourself as actually dead, lying in a box with a lid on it?" Guildenstern candidly and meaningfully replies "no," and Rosencrantz agrees. However, the usually oblivious Rosencrantz then pinpoints the main issue—"one thinks of it like being alive in a box, one keeps forgetting to take into account the fact that one is dead ... which should make all the difference ... shouldn't it? I mean, you'd never know you were in a box, would you? It would be just like being asleep in a box." When people attempt to consider their own deaths, they often imagine some form of ongoing consciousness. Ironically, in this speech, Rosencrantz displays the exact kind of reasoning he just labeled "silly." After equating death to sleep, he links it to a mortal dream state, complete with the potential of waking up and a sense of powerlessness—"not that I'd like to sleep in a box, mind you, not without air." Unable to fully comprehend his own death, he refuses to accept that "for all the compasses in the world, there's only one direction, and time is its only measure."
Life and Death
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead poignantly explores themes of existence, mortality, and the limitations imposed upon individuals by the roles they inhabit. The play presents life as a theatrical construct, where its two main characters, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, navigate a bewildering series of events. They are caught in a labyrinth with no recollection of past experiences, propelled inevitably towards their own demise. This journey is emblematic of the human condition; their actions are not of their own making but are instead orchestrated by the playwright, who dictates every move as per the dramatic demands of Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
Their consciousness springs into being with the utterance of their names in Hamlet. Outside of their scripted interactions, they linger in a state of existential limbo, desperately searching for meaning in their existence. This quest for understanding, however, is perennially thwarted by the constraints of the narrative they inhabit, leaving them increasingly despondent.
The specter of death looms ever closer, a fate sealed by the narrative arc of Hamlet, as Stoppard assumes the audience’s familiarity with the original play. Although Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are largely oblivious to these portents, the signs of their impending end are subtly woven throughout the story. The encounter with The Player is especially foreboding for Guildenstern, who perceives this figure as a grim harbinger: "It could have been—a bird out of season, dropping bright-feathered on my shoulder. . . . It could have been a tongueless dwarf standing by the road to point the way. . . . I was prepared. But it’s this, is it? No enigma, no dignity, nothing classical, portentous, only this—a comic pornographer and a rabble of prostitutes." This reflection highlights the farcical and arbitrary nature of their existence and ultimate fate.
The inevitability of their death materializes as the play unfolds, aligning precisely with their last appearance in Shakespeare’s narrative. The circularity of their journey underscores the themes of futility and predestination, drawing a parallel to the human experience at large. Their story is a somber yet comedic meditation on how individuals grapple with the constraints of fate and the search for meaning in a world where their paths are seemingly predestined by forces beyond their control.
Theater and Dramatic Conventions
Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead ingeniously intertwines the familiar narrative of Shakespeare’s Hamlet with the existential musings characteristic of Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. By embedding his characters in the world of Hamlet, Stoppard constructs a rich tapestry of theatrical references that resonate with audiences well-versed in classic literature. However, the play's influences extend beyond Shakespearean drama. The existential quandary faced by the protagonists resonates strongly with the liminal, confused existence depicted in Beckett’s work, where characters navigate a void, uncertain of the past, present, or future.
Stoppard’s exploration transcends mere intertextuality; he delves into the realm of theatrical conventions and metatheatricality. Throughout the play, he dismantles the traditional boundary between performer and spectator. By breaking the "fourth wall," characters like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern become acutely aware of their existence as fictional entities, acknowledging the audience and the artifice around them. This self-awareness amplifies the theme of existential uncertainty, adding layers of meaning to their predicament, akin to the "actor’s nightmare," where one finds themselves thrust onto an unfamiliar stage, bereft of script or direction.